I CHAPTER I METHODOLOGY I I Variables of the Study Objectives Hypotheses Tools used for Collection Description of the Tools Sample Experimental Procedure Statistical Techques I data
METHODOLOGY Methodology discusses the systematic procedures by whch the researcher starts fiom the initial identification of the problem to its final conclusions. The present study examines the effect of Mastery Learning Strategy on the Problem Solving Ability of secondary school students in Physics. The variables of the study, tools used for measurement, sample of the study, data collection procedures, scoring procedures and statistical techruques used in this study are detailed in this chapter. 3. VARIABLES OF THE STUDY Variables are the conditions or characteristics that the experimenter manipulates, controls or observes. The independent variables, dependent variables and the controlled variables of the present study are detailed below. Dependent Variable The dependent variable in the present study was Problem Solving Ability in Physics of students of standard IX. Independent Variable The independent variable for the present study was the Instructional Strategy (Mastery Learning Strategy I Conventional Strategy).
Controlled Variables The controlled variables were Non-verbal intelligence, Verbal Intelligence, Socio-Economic Status, Previous Achievement and Sex. 3.2 OBJECTIVES The objectives of the present study are presented below as one general objective and a set of specific objectives. General Obiective To find out the effect of Mastery Learning Strategy on the Problem Solving Ability in Physics of secondary school students. Specific Objectives. To find out the effect of Instructional Strategy (Mastery Learning StrategylConventional Strategy), with Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Previous Achievement as covariates, on Problem Solving Ability in Physics of students of Standard IX. 2. To find out the effect of Instructional Strategy (Mastery Learning StrategylConventional Strategy), with Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Previous Achevement as covariates, on the first component of Problem Solving Ability (Comprehencbng the Problem) in Physics of students of Standard IX. 3. To find out the effect of Instructional Strategy (Mastery Learning StrategyIConventional Stratea), with Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Previous Achievement as covariates, on
Methodology 76 the second component of Problem Solving Ability (Clarifying the problem) in Physics of students of Standard IX. 4. To find out the effect of Instructional Strategy (Mastery Learning Strategy/Conventional Strategy), with Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Previous Achievement as covariates, on third component of Problem Solving Ability Finding Solution to the Problem) in Physics of students of Standard IX. 5. To study the Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy, Nonverbal Intelligence and Verbal Intelligence, if there existed any effect of Instructional Strategy, on the Components of Problem Solving Ability for the total sample. 6. To study the Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy, Nonverbal Intelligence and Verbal Intelligence, if there existed any effect of Instructional Strategy, on the Components of Problem Solving Ability for girls of the total sample. 7. To study the Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy, Nonverbal Intelligence and Verbal Intelligence, if there existed any effect of Instructional Strategy, on the Components of Problem Solving Ability for boys of the total sample. 8. To study the Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy and Previous Acluevement, if there existed any effect of Instructional Strategy, on the Components of Problem Solving Ability for total sample.
Methodology 77 9. To study the Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy and Previous Achevement, if there existed any effect of Instructional Strategy, on the Components of Problem Solving Ability for girls of the total sample. 0. To study the Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy and Previous Achievement, if there existed any effect of Instructional Strategy, on the Components of Problem Solving Ability for boys of the total sample. 3.3 HYPOTHESES. There will be significant effect of Instructional Strategy (Mastery Learning StrategyIConventional Strategy), with Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Previous Achievement as covariates, on Problem Solving Ability in Physics of students of Standard IX. 2. There will be significant effect of Instructional Strategy (Mastery Learning StrategyIConventional Strategy), with Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Previous Achievement as covariates, on Problem Solving Ability component viz; Comprehendmg the Problem, in Physics of students of Standard IX. 3. There will be sipficant effect of Instructional Strategy (Mastery Learning Strategy/Conventional Strategy), with Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Previous Achievement as covariates, on Problem Solving Ability component 2 viz; Clarifying the Problem, in Physics of students of Standard IX.
Methodology 78 4. There will be significant effect of Instructional Strategy (Mastery Learning Strategy/Conventional Strategy), with Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Previous Achievement as covariates, on Problem Solving Ability component 3 viz; Finding Solution to the Problem, in Physics of students of Standard IX. 5. There will be significant Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy, Nonverbal Intelligence and Verbal Intelligence on those Components of Problem Solving Ability upon whch there existed an effect of Instructional Strategy, for the total sample. 6. There will be significant Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy, Nonverbal Intelligence and Verbal Intelligence on those Components of Problem Solving Ability upon which there existed an effect of Instructional Strategy, for girls of the total sample. 7. There will be significant Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy, Nonverbal Intelligence and Verbal Intelligence on those Components of Problem Solving Ability upon whch there existed an effect of Instructional Strategy, for boys of the total sample. 8. There will be significant Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy and Previous Achievement, if there existed any effect of Instructional Strategy, on the Components of Problem Solving Ability, for the total sample. 9. There will be significant Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy and Previous Achievement, if there existed
Methodology 79 any effect of Instructional Strategy, on the Components of Problem Solving Ability, for the girls of the total sample. 0. There will be significant Main effects and Interaction effects of Instructional Strategy and Previous Achievement, if there existed any effect of Instructional Strategy, on the Components of Problem Solving Ability, for the boys of the total sample. 3.4 TOOLS USED FOR COLLECTION OF DATA The various tools used for measuring the parameters of this study are listed in table 3.. S. No. 2 3 4 5 Variable Non-verbal Intelligence Verbal Intelligence Socio-economic status Previous Achevement Problem Solving Ability TABLE 3. Tools Used in the Study Tools Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices Verbal Intelligence Test based on triarchic theory Socio-Economic Status Scale Standardised Achievement Test developed by the investigator (Pre test scores) Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics developed by the investigator
Methodology 80 3.5. DESCRIPTION OF THE TOOLS The general structure, the scoring procedure and the psychometric properties of the tools employed in h s study are detailed below. 3.5. RAVEN'S STANDARD PROGRESSIVE MATRICES The Nonverbal Intelligence of students were tested with Standard Progressive Matrices 996 Edition prepared by Raven, Court and Raven published by Oxford Psychologists Press, Lambowne House, Oxford, UK. Nonverbal Intelligence of the subjects were measured by admmstering the Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices Test. This nonverbal test is intended to estimate the subjects7 ability to discern and utilize a logical relationship presented by nonverbal materials. The test consists of 5 subtests of 2 items each. In each item a part of the geometrical design is missing. Six or eight alternatives are given for each design. All of these fit the missing part, but only one logically belongs to it. The test is a popular measure of the "g" factor of intelligence. Validity of the test has been studied in a variety of usual ways. When Stanford-Binet test was used as the criterion, correlation varied fiom 0.50 to 036. The reliability coefficients as reported by Raven vary fiom 0.80 to 0.90.
Methodology 8 3.5.2 VERBAL INTELLIGENCE TEST BASED ON TRIARCHIC THEORY To test the Verbal Intelligence the Verbal Intelligence Test based on Triarchic Theory developed by Dr.V. Sumangala and Sholy Joseph (2005) of the Department of Education, University of Calicut was used. The test contains 38 questions in three sections. The first section contains 4 questions, second section has 3 questions and the thud section has questions. The test was based on Triarcluc Intelligence theory of Sternberg. The scoring procedure of the test is to give one score for each correct answer and zero score for each incorrect ones, except in cases of tests I (iii) and I (iv). In test I (iii) the strategy used by the respondent for arriving at the solution is critical and hence score depends on the systematic strategy used. An additional score of will be given to items under these tests if the strategy followed is systematic. In test I (iv) the nature of representation is crucial. Therefore scoring depends on whether the respondent used an external or literal representation of the information for arriving at the right answer. Here also an addtional score of one will be given if there is correct external representation. The validity of the test was estimated empirically by comparing the scores of the test with 'The Kerala Non Verbal Group Test of Intelligence for Secondary School Pupils' (Nair, 968). The coefficient of correlation so obtained is 0.62 (N=40) indicating that the test has concurrent validity. Reliability of the test was established by the testretest method. The test-retest reliability coefficient is 0.79 (N=40). The
above evidences suggest that the test is reliable and valid to measure intelligence of secondary school pupils. 3.5.3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS SCALE in 973. The scale developed by Kuppuswami was moddied by K.S. Pillai The criteria adopted for giving weightage to the level of income was further modfied by Dr. Sivarajan and Subrahmaniadas (998) with the consent of the experts in educational research and The Department of Economics and Statistics, Government of Kerala. The investigator used the same scale without major modifications. weightage has been given according to the table 3.2. TABLE 3.2 Weightage given in the SES scale according to Educational level, Occupation and Income of Parents The S. No. Education Masters Degree, Professional Degree, above Wtg. 0 Occupation Professional Wtg. 0 Income Per month Above 8000 Wtg. 0 2 Bachelor's Degree 8 Semiprofessional 8 600-8000 8 3 Higher Secondary 5 Skilled worker 7 400-6000 6 4 SSLC 4 Semi-skilled worker 4 240-4000 4 5 Up to Std. VIII 2 Unskilled Labourer 2 80-2400 2-6 7 Literate Illiterate 0 Unemployed 0 800 and below
Methodology 83 Note on the jobs coming under each category of occupation. Professional - Mitusters, Judges, Bank Executives and Officials, Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, University level Teachers, Heads of organizations, Heads of Government Departments, Secretaries of the Government, Business Executives etc. belong to the professional category. Semi-Professional - Chemists, Druggists, Qualified Nurses, Teachers, managers, Superintend officer, Mmor Business man, contractors, small land lords, sub-inspectors of Police, Excise Inspectors, Sub-registrar, Assistant Educational Officers, Block Development Officers, Officers of the sub district etc. will come under this category. Slulled Workers - Mechanics, Fitters, Electricians, Drivers, Photographers, Laboratory Assistants, Carpenter, mason, Valul Clerks, Police head Constables, and the llke will come under category. Semi-slulled workers - Farmers, Small-scale mechanics, Library attenders, Police Constables etc. belong to thls category. Unskilled workers Labourers - Coolies, Ordinary Labourers, Watchman. Peons etc belong to this category. 3.5.4 STANDARDISED ACHIEVEMENT TEST An achevement test for the first four chapters of Physics of the IX standard was developed and standardised by the investigator. The description of the content, the procedure of ahstration, scoring and technical data about reliability and validity are detailed below.
Methodology 84 The First step in constructing an achievement test is to design the test. There are three dimensions to the design. They are: Weightage to the objectives, Weightage to the content and Weightage to the Type of Questions. The objectives to be tested were selected based on the Bloom's Taxonomy. Thus the six objectives of the cognitive domain viz., Knowledge, Understandmg, Application, analysis, Synthesis and Evaluation were selected for testing. TABLE 3.3 Weightage to the objectives v S. No. Objectives Marks 9'0 l Knowledge 4.4 2 Understanding 4.4 3 Application l l 3.4 4 Analysis 6 7.2 5 Synthesis 4.4 6 Evaluation 6 7.2 Total 35 00
Methodology 85 The achievement test was prepared for the first four chapters of Physics in the IX standard. The chapters are. Colours of Light, 2. Motion, 3. Force and 4. Gravitation. TABLE 3.4 Weightage to the content S. No. Content Marks YO Chapter I 7 20.0 2 Chapter I 6 7. 3 Chapter I 2 34.3 4 Chapter IV 0 28.6 Total 35 00 As the test was designed to measure different objectives including higher-level outcomes llke Analysis, Synthesis and Evaluation different types of questions were necessary to be included. Thus essay and short answer questions were included in addition to objective type questions.
Methodology 86 S. No. 2 TABLE 3.5 Weightage to the type of questions Type of questions Marks Objective 7 Short Answer 20 % 20.0 57. 3 Essay 8 22.9 Total 35 00 Thus the weightages were properly decided with respect to objectives, content and the type of questions so that a blue print of the test could be made. 3.5.4. Blue Print of a Test A blue print gives the details of the design in concrete terms. It is a three dimensional chart giving the placement of different questions with respect to objectives tested, content area and form of questions. In addition to these dimensions, the blue print will also indicate the numerical weightage to each question, individually.
Methodology 88 The question paper prepared for the pilot test was submitted to subject experts - the physical science teachers of Farook high School And Tirur Government Girls High School - for seekmg critical comments. The draft test was prepared by incorporating their suggested modifications. The draft test prepared for the pilot test contained 20 objective questions, 6 short answer questions and 2 essay questions. A copy of the draft test is given in the Appendx VII. The test was for 60 marks and was adrmnistered for a total duration of l hour 20 minutes. The test was admrnistered in two sessions. The first section of 20 objective questions and 2 essay questions was adrmnistered to 00 students of Farook High School, Farook College, Calicut. The scores so obtained were subjected to item analysis. On the basis of item analysis out of the 20 objective questions 7 items were selected to be incorporated in the final test. These items were selected according to the steps suggested by Garrett (973). Garrett (962, p.368) suggests that items with discriminating power of 0.20 or more and difficulty index of 0.40 to 0.60 are regarded as satisfactory.
TABLE 3.7 Summary of Item Analysis of the Achievement Test (Objective Type) Methodology 89 Qn. No Discriminating Power 0.37" Difficulty Index 0.82 Selected or not 2 0.30" 0.30 3 0.5 0.5 4-0.5 0.22 5 0.74" 0.4" J 6 0. 0.32 7 0.52" 0.59" J 8 0.4" 0.65" 4 9 0.30" 0.33 0 0.04 0.32 m l l 0.04 0.39 2 0.30" 0.44 3 0.44' 0.63" J 4 0.37" 0.33 5 0.33" 0.80 6 0.44" 0.74* J 7 0.26* 0.83 8 9 0.37" 0.407" 0.37" 0.43* J 4 20 0.9 0.87 Note: The asterisk mark indicates that the value agrees the criterion for selection.
Methodology 90 The second section of 6 short answer questions was administered to the same students. Discrimination indices of the items were found out using the Pearson's Product Moment Correlation Method. Of the 6 short answer questions 2 were significant of whch 0 items were selected for the final test. The two essay questions were significant and were included in the final test. The item analysis of these items is detailed in the table 3.8. TABLE 3.8 Item Analysis of the Achievement Test (short answer &Essay Type) I Qn. No. ( Correlation coefficient ( Selected or not 6.7 ** J * indicates that value is si@cant at.o l level ** indicates that value is significant at.oo level
Methodology 9 A copy of the final achievement test is given as Appendix VIII. Reliability The reliability of the test was established by the test - retest method. The test was administered to 40 students of Government Girls figh School, Tirur and the retest was conducted after three weeks fiom fist admmistration. Thus the reliability was calculated using the Pearson Correlation Coefficient Method and was found to be 0.74. Validity Since the test was conducted keeping in view the weightage for content and instructional objectives, on the one hand, and the experts' comments on the other, it was treated as a valid test. Also to ensure criterion validity the correlation between the scores of the test with the marks in Science was found out. For this marks obtained by the students were collected from school records. Thus the concurrent validity was calculated using the Pearson Correlation Coefficient Method and was found to be 0.64. 3.5.5 PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY TEST DEVELOPED BY THE INVESTIGATOR Since no Problem Solving Ability test was available ready at hand, the investigator had to begin from the roots to construct one suited for the purpose. Studies on higher cognitive abilities are scarce and those on problem solving are even less. Even though theories on scientific problem solving are in plenty, none of them directly mentioned the components of problem solving. Various authors have
Metlzodology 92 elaborated upon the steps in problem solving but the ingredients of the concept were hardly touched. The components of Problem Solving Ability had to be made up carefully by assimilating the theories and by consulting with experts in the field. Analyzing the various attributes of the construct- problem solving, a list of possible components of Problem Solving Ability was initially made. The preliminary list consisted of 30 items. The following abilities were identified as the sub components of Problem Solving Ability and this formed the preliminary list of sub components of Problem Solving Ability.. Sensing a problem 2. Stating the problem 3. Slull of observation 4. Comprehending 5. Observing closely (in detail) the problem in its gestalt (scanning). 6. Discriminate between closely related concepts 7. Analysis (breaking down the elements in the problem) 8. Identifying the connections relations of the problem space 9. Divergent thinlung of the connections or relations of the problem space (seeing it from different angles) 0. Inductive reasoning. Relating new problem with familiarized problems (transfer of learning) 2. Visualizing a range of possible solutions 3. Memory
Methodology 93 Deductive reasoning Detecting errors logical flaws (in hypothesis) Using analogies for reasoning. Eliminating superfluous hypothesis. (Focusing /filtering/ sorting of multiple hypothesis to reduce the no.) Prediction of happenings. Conceiving appropriate (experimental) procedure to test hypotheses (transform the theory to practical.) Controlling of variables. Picture drawing slull Shll in selecting and setting up of apparatus Recording (Accuracy in) observation and measurement. Drawing inference fiom (relevant) observed data/ observation 25. Conceiving identical set of procedures for test of hypotheses (or is it mference/conclusion) 26. Controlling variables. 27. Skill in selecting and setting up of apparatus 28. Recording (Accuracy in) observation and measurement. 29. Picture drawing skill 30. Arriving at generalization. Ths list was presented before subject experts and a consolidated list was arrived at. Some of them were not viable for a paper pencil test. Thus after expert screening some components were deleted, some were added and a few were renamed. The new list of components was rescheduled under three heads.
Methodology 94 3.5.5. Components of Problem Solving Ability The final list of the components was arranged as below. It contains three components viz; Comprehending the Problem, ClarifLing the Problem and Finding Solution to the Problem. Each component has its subcomponents.. COMPREHENDING THE PROBLEM. Sensing a problem 2. Defining the problem 3. Analysis of the problem into discrete elements. 2. CLARIFYING THE PROBLEM. Ability to discriminate between the most relevant and closely related concepts. 2. Using analogies for reasoning 3. Using Inductive/deductive reasoning. 4. Hypothesizing 5. Checkmg the testability of hypotheses 3. FINDING SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM. Controlling of variables. 2. Prediction of Happening. 3. Conceiving ideas using diagrammatic representation. 4. Conceiving a strategy to execute a plan of action to test the hypothesis. 5. Drawing Inference from relevant observed data. 6. Generalizing.
Methodology 95 The first major component viz; comprehending problem represents the initial stage of acquainting with the problem. To attack it intellectually one has to build a rapport with the structure of the problem. Comprehending involves mental processes, which would help the problem solver to evolve a more concrete structure of the problem. The subcomponents that come under this head are detailed below. 3.5.5.. Sensing a problem - Only a few can wilfully take up a problem. There are thousands of problems. But an individual may not respond to all. Some problems affect the individual and put him in disequilibrium. The individual can be in equilibrium only &er solving it. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below. In a room, yellow light is produced with a sodium vapour lamp. In the next room, yellow light is produced by combining the primary colours red and green. When red, green and whte buttons where inspected in these lights the following facts were observed. Of these which fact seems to be not natural to you?. In the room where red and green lights are mixed to produce yellow light, the red button appeared red and the green appeared green. 2. In the light of sodium vapour lamp, the red and green buttons appeared dark. 3. In the light of sodium vapour lamp, the white button appeared yellow. 4. In the room where composite yellow colour is present, white button appeared yellow.
Methodology 96 3.5.5..2 Defining the problem - Perceiving the problem is one thing but to put it verbally is another thing. Statement of the problem is very important. Well begun is half done - goes the saying. Putting the mental imagery of the problem into a verbal statement is the right beginning towards problem solving. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below. A lorry driver was carefully dtlving hs vehcle through a road in the high range in the night. There was thck fog in the atmosphere. It was difficult to see far. The driver switched on two more white lights (additional lamps) other than the headlights. But it did not help to see far; rather, the fog appeared more illuminated. To see far through the fog is really a difficult task. Whlch of the following statements given below does exactly describe the problem here?. To drive through a high range road in the night is very &fficult. 2. Whlte light just illuminates the fog and does not help seeing far. 3. Tiny water droplets condense and remain suspended in the atmosphere malung it very a cult to see through the fog. 4. The additional white lights do not help to see through the fog. 3.5.5..3 Analysis of the problem into discrete elements. - Ths involves brealung down the problem into simpler constituents - concepts, quantities, persons, hgs etc- so as to comprehend its structure. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below.
Ramu was watering the plants in his garden with a hose in front of his home at night. Since the length of the hose was a bit short of the required length he squeezed at the bore of the hose so as to force a jet of water gush up to the far end. Further he held the hose at different angles. Ramu was trying to make the distance of fall of water (range) to a maximum. mch group given below represents the main factors in this situation? l.angle, maximum range, absence of light 2. range, water, hose 3. force of flow of water, angle, maximum range 4. night, maximum, hose The second major component viz; ClarifLing the problem is an attempt to untangle the intricacies of the problem so as to attack the problem intellectually. Clarifying involves mental processes of employing common thinking strategies, whlch would help the researcher to solve the problem. The subcomponents that come under this head are detailed below. 3.5.5..4 Ability to discriminate between the most relevant and closely related concepts. - Thls involves differentiating and discriminating the minor concepts involved in the problem, whch are quite fimdamental in the constitution of the problem. A sample item from the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below. Two fnends A and B went into the forest. When B was resting under a mango tree, A went in search of water. But he lost hs way on
Methodology 98 return. A wandered for kilometers in several du-ections in search of B. But he was never far fiom B for more than a hundred metres. Whlch is the most relevant and closely related pair of concepts pertinent to this situation?. Velocity and acceleration 2. Distance and displacement 3. Velocity and displacement 4. Kilometer and metre 3.5.5..5 Using analogies for reasoning - Analogies consist of an organized system of symmetrical relations based on identities of parts of structures. Mere similarity of shared features by two objects cannot possibly account for an analogy. Analogies provide comparisons whch can be used to explain a difficult-to-understand concept by pointing out its similarities to something easier to understand or already understood. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below. Friction between two surfaces is caused by the irregular ups and downs on the surface. When a body is dragged over another these microscopic ups and downs mutually get locked and a force is produced in the opposite direction of movement. This force is the fhctional force. mch of the situations given below is similar to h s phenomenon?. The rough surfaces of two sand papers rubbed each other. 2. A pad lock is opened and locked using its key. 3. Two hfes are rubbed mutually and vertically. 4. Two hooks are mutually hooked in and pulled
Methodology 99 3.5.5..6 Using Inductive/deductive reasoning. - Problem solving is a building up process. For hs, specific relations or specific instances of the problem are worked out and the inferences are extrapolated to a general situation. Thdung both ways - inferring fiom specific instances and generalizing as well as applying a generalization to a specific instance - is part of the intellectual processes involves in solving a problem. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing hs subcomponent, is illustrated below. Read the three sentences in h s paragraph. (i) Earth attracts all objects, which are near to the Earth towards its centre. (ii) Earth attracts all objects below the surface of Earth towards its centre. (iii) Earth attracts all objects above the surface of Earth towards its centre. On the basis of the above statements what Inference can we make?. Earth attracts all objects towards its centre. 2. Earth attracts almost all objects towards its centre. 3. All objects attract Earth towards them. 4. Earth attracts objects that are away fiom Earth towards its centre. 3.5.5..7 Hypothesizing - A hypothesis is essentially a product of constructive imagination. According to James Creighton, " Hypothesis is a tentative supposition or provisional guess, which seems to explain the situation under observation." Without some such supposition it is not possible to make any progress in scientific enquiry. Analogy and simple methods of induction are helpful in fiaming hypothesis. Depth of knowledge, imagination and genuine interest in the subject help in framing hitful hypothesis. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below.
Methodology 00 An athlete instead of throwing the javelin fiom the place where he stands, runs fast fiom a distance and throws the javelin. What could be the reason?. The distance through whch the athlete runs and the range of the javelin may be related. 2. The speed attained by the athlete and the range of the javelin may be related. 3. The speed attained by the athlete and the muscle power gained by the athlete may be related. 4. A running person may have control over the angle at which the javelin is held. 3.5.5..8 Checking the testability of hypotheses - A hypothesis can be accepted only when it is consistent with all relevant facts and wellestablished laws of nature. Also all such hypotheses are not viable for actual experimentation. Only those hypotheses that can be tested facilitate the real problem solving process. The success of a scientific investigation depends on the formulation of a good hypothesis, without the guidance of whch we shall not know what to do or observe or what experiment to perform. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below. Given below are logical statements. Among these whch one is testable with a simple experiment?, When dfferent colours are made to pass through a glass slab, the largest deviation will be for the violet light ray. 2. When light of different frequencies is made to pass through a
glass slab, the largest deviation will be forbe light ray with the maximum frequency. 3. When light of different wavelengths is made to pass through a glass slab, the least deviation will be for the light ray with the maximum wavelength. 4. When a light ray passes through a glass slab its speed changes. The third major component of Problem Solving Ability is Finding Solution to the Problem. This component includes cognitive efforts to experiment, infer and generalize. 3.5.5..9 Controlling of variables. - Ths is one of the important process skills a science student should possess. In fact an experiment is an active observation where the variables are controlled. The ability to decide which variables are to be controlled and whch are to be observed is the crux of experimenting slull. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing thls subcomponent, is illustrated below. To study whether different masses take. different times whle falling down from a height, an experiment was conducted on the surface of the Moon. Different masses were allowed to fall freely. In this experiment the down ward acceleration is fixed. Also there is no air resistance. To find out the correct relation between mass and the time of fall whch factor then has to be controlled and kept constant?. the surface area of the object 2. spherical shape of the object. 3. density of the object. 4. height of fall.
Methodology 02 3.5.5..0 Prediction of Happening. - Ths component tests the ability of a student to extrapolate the known facts and concepts, already assimilated, into the unknown, unfamiliar or new situations. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing hs subcomponent, is illustrated below. Aero planes have a streamlined design. The fiont end is pointed to reduce fnction while traveling through air. Suppose a space vehcle is designed to travel only through the outer space, then. the fiont as well as the rear end should be pointed. 2. the fiont end alone need be pointed. 3. the shape should be spherical. 4. there is no need to make it stream lined. 3.5.5.. Conceiving ideas using diagrammatic representation. - In Science, diagrams and pictures are inevitable tools for concept formation. Most of the abstract ideas and concepts in Physics find meaningful expressions in the form of symbols or diagrams. In problem solving also, a science student employs mental imagery to concretize hs ideas. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below. In the hagrams given below are square cubes of different sizes placed one over the other. Of the given arrangements, whch is most stable?
Methodology 03 4. 3.5.5..2 Conceiving a strategy to execute a plan of action to test the hypothesis. - Imagining an experiment before actually performing it helps the scientist to optimize the settings, eradcate logical flaws and stnke upon the best possible way of obtaining sharp results. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below. Some rays emanating fiom the remote control of the TV and falling on the set control the TV set. To test the truth of this statement, whch experimental procedure is the most appropriate?. The remote is operated with its battery placed in and removed. 2. The power supply of the TV set is switched on and off and the remote is test operated. 3. The outer cover of the remote control is opened and the inner parts are observed and sketched. 4. A thck screen is placed in between the remote control and the TV set and the remote is test operated. 3.5.5..3 Drawing inference from relevant observed data. - The renowned astronomer, Tycho Brahe (546-60) amassed accurate
Methodology 04 observations of astronomical data using his superior instruments. His intention was to adduce sufficient proof for the geocentric theory of Universe. But it is one of the remarkable ironies of History that the very same data was used by his assistant and successor, Johann Kepler, to banish geocentrism once and for all fiom astronomic circles, and to enthrone the very Copernican system, whch hs master so vehemently distrusted. This anecdote suggests, how the inference drawn fiom a set of given data becomes crucial in solving a problem. This subcomponent tests the student's ability to meaningfully interpret the data in the light of common sense. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing h s subcomponent, is illustrated below. The velocity of a moving object and the corresponding time is given in the chart below. Whtch of the following Inferences is correct? Velocity(m/s) 40 40 38 36 34 36 38 40 40 Time interval (second) 0- -2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9. The object accelerated in the interval of 0- seconds 2. The object accelerated in the interval of 0-2 seconds 3. The object accelerated in the interval of 5-8 seconds 4. The object accelerated in the interval of 7-9 seconds 3.5.5..4 Generalizing. - Generalisation is made when similar sets of experiments show the same result. A sample item fiom the draft test for Problem Solving Ability, testing this subcomponent, is illustrated below.
Methodology 05 When an object was dragged along the surface of a table with a spring balance attached to it the reading initially increased but decreased when the object started moving and remained constant thereafter. When Rarnu tried to push a wheelbarrow with load he had to use a lot of force, but when it started moving, he found a lesser force was sufficient. People were trying to push a bus that had a break down from the road to the side. At first more people had to push together to move the bus. Later only lesser people pushed the moving bus to the side of the road. From these situations what general principle about firctional force can be reached at?. The fictional force is less before the object moved. 2. The firctional force is maximum before the object starts moving and decreases when it starts moving. 3. The variations in fictional force cause many difficulties in life. 4. The sliding friction is more than the rolling fnction. 3.5.5.2 Design of the Problem Solving Ability Test The Problem Solving Ability test was developed for the first four chapters in the subject of Physics of M standard. The chapters were;. Colours of Light 2. Motion 3. Force 4. Gravitation
Methodology 06 Multiple choice items were prepared so as to test the Problem Solving Ability in the four units of Physics. Ebel (972) suggests that multiple choice items are currently the most highly regarded and widely used form of objective test items. Multiple choice tests tend to be more objective, more efficient and less subject to sampling errors. Students often find multiple choice items less ambiguous than other test forms. Again there is convenience for scoring and analysis, if multiple choice items are selected. The draft of the Problem Solving Ability test was prepared such that each sub component of the Problem Solving Ability is tested in all the four chapters. And a few additional items were prepared wherever possible so as to compensate the weightage of content in the event of elimination of some of the items on item analysis. A total of 62 items were prepared giving due weightage to the content portion as well as to the ability sub components. A copy of the draft test is given as Appendix.
Methodology 07 TABLE 3.9 Summary of the Weightage given to subcomponents and chapters in the draft test of Problem Solving Ability SI. No. Sub-components Chapter Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 TOTAL Sensing a problem 2 5 2 3 4 Defining the problem Analysis of the problem into discrete elements. Ability to discriminate between the most relevant and closely related concepts. 2 4 5 4 5 Using analogies for reasoning 2 5 6 Using Inductive deductive reasoning. 4 7 Hypothesizing l 4 8 Prediction of Happening. 2 4 Checking the testability of hypotheses 2 4 0 Conceiving a strategy to execute a plan of action to test the hypothesis. 2 5 Controlling of variables. 2 4 2 l3 Conceiving ideas using diagrammatic representation. Drawing inference from relevant observed data. 2 3 5 5 4 Generalizing. 2 4 TOTAL 5 4 4 9 62
Methodology 08 The draft test was admmistered to a total of 32 students fi-om three divisions of ninth standard students. The students were fi-om Farook High School, Farook College, Calicut and fiom Tirur Government Girls High School, Tirur. Discriminating power of the items were calculated using the formula D= (U-L) / N, where U - the number of students who answered correctly in upper group. L - the number of students who answered correctly in lower group and N - Total number of students in each group. The size of the upper and lower group was taken as 27 percent of the total group; hence N= 36. The table 3.0 shows the break up of the sample selected for administration of the draft test of Problem Solving Ability. TABLE 3.0 Break up of the sample selected for administration of the draft test of Problem Solving Ability Name of School Boys Girls Total Tirur Govt. Girls HS 0 37 37 Farook HS, Division A 20 29 49 Farook HS, Division B 23 23 46 Total 43 89 32 The drar test contained 62 items; each item carried one mark and was admmstered for a total duration of hour 20 minutes. There was no time restriction for the test. However most of the students answered the test in an hour. The scores so obtained were subjected to item analysis. On the basis of item analysis out of the 62 objective questions
Methodology 09 50 items were selected to be incorporated in the final test. These items were selected according to the steps suggested by Garrett (973). Garrett (962, p.368) suggests that items with discriminating power of 0.20 or more are regarded as satisfactory. Most of the items selected for the final test had a discriminating index of 0.30 or above. However a few items with discriminating indices ranging in between 0.25 and 0.30 also were selected to ensure due weightage to the content areas TABLE 3. Summary of Item Analysis of the Problem Solving Ability Test
Methodology 0
Methodology Note: The asterisk mark inhcates that the value agrees the criterion for selection. 3.5.5.3 Scoring Procedure Students were asked to encircle the number of the alternative on the very question paper itself. This avoided confusion and possible errors while marking answers on a separate paper. Each item was given a score of one. Thus the test had a maximum score of 50. 3.5.5.4 Reliability The reliability of the test was established by the test - retest method. The Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics was adrmnistered to 40 students of Government Boys High School, Tirur and the retest was conducted after three weeks fi-om first administration. Thus the reliability was calculated using the Pearson Correlation Coefficient Method for the test as a whole and for the three components separately.
Methodology 2 The correlation coefficient of the Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics is h shed in the table 3.2. TABLE 3.2 Test-Retest Reliability of Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics Name of the testlcomponents Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics Comprehending the Problem ClarifLing the Problem Finding Solution to the Problem Pearson's correlation Coefficient (N=40) 0.74 0.6 0.56 0.54 The reliability values for the test and its components are reasonably hlgh and hence the test is assumed to be reliable. 3.5.5.5 Validity Since the test was prepared with the necessary theoretical support in identifjmg the subcomponents of Problem Solving Ability under the close supervision of expert teachers in the fields of Education and Psychology and since that the items were moulded so as to reflect the true intention of testing the particular sub-component, the Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics can be said to have content validity. Also to ensure criterion validity the correlation was found out between the scores of the Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics with the scores of Nonverbal Intelligence Test (Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices) and Verbal Intelligence Test (Verbal Intelligence Test based
on triarchic theory). For this all the three tests were administered to 40 students of ninth standard of Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Tirur. The validity coefficient of the Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics was calculated using the Pearson's correlation coefficient. The criterion validity with the Verbal Intelligence Test based on triarchc theory and its three components are h shed in the table 3.3 TABLE 3.3 Validity Coefficient of Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics with the Verbal Intelligence - Test based on triarchic theory Name of the test/components Verbal Intelligence Test based on triarchic theory (Total Score) Verbal Intelligence Test based on triarchc theory (part I) Verbal Intelligence Test based on triarchc theory (part ) Verbal Intelligence Test based on triarchic theory @art ) Pearson's correlation Coefficient (N=40) 0.56 0.37 0.47 0.45 Again the validity coefficient of the Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics was calculated using the Pearson's correlation coefficient by comparing it with the with the Nonverbal Intelligence Test and was found to be 0.55.
Metlzodology 4 The Problem Solving Ability Test in Physics shows a fairly good correlation with the Nonverbal Intelligence and Verbal intelligence tests and hence it can be concluded that the test has the necessary criterion validity. 3.5.6 DESIGN OF MASTERY LEARNING UNITS As detailed in Chapter, mastery learning units were prepared keeping in mind the four basic tasks and their related subtasks as suggested by Block and Anderson (985). The complete mastery model as detailed in chapter served as the master plan in the execution phase of the intervention. Thus a mastery learning unit of instruction will include:. A general introduction 2. Specific Objectives 3. Pre-assessments 4. Primary instruction (3 or 4 lesson plans) 5. Alternative instruction 6. Formative evaluations 7. Summative evaluations In accordance with the Mastery Learning model given in chapter I a format was designed for the actual implementation of the Mastery Learning Strategy in the real classroom situation. The flow chart in figure 3- demonstrates the phases of Mastery Learning Strategy used in the experiment.
Methodology 5 previous knowledge '3 obiective sub unit Formative test Masters I Non-Masters I Enrichment (Additional reading, peer tutoring, activities) Remedial progr-e (Peer Tutoring, Direct Teaching, Alternate LE) Mastery attained? - Teach next Chapter sub unit 4 No complete? I Summative Evaluation FIGURE 3-. Flow chart indicating the phases of Mastery Learning Strategy (as employed in the real class room situation)
Methodology 6 A sample format showing of the mastery learning subunits of the first chapter is given as Appendix I and a sample lesson plan with anticipated remedial measures and enrichment activities employed for Mastery Learning Strategy which forms part of this subunit is given as Appendix. The original learning experiences provided in both the groupsexperimental and control groups- were the same for curriculum transaction. Thus the same lesson plan with the original set of learning experiences was employed in both groups for regular instruction. Additional learning experiences were provided apart from ths to the experimental group in the form of enrichment activities I corrective measures which form part of the mastery learning cycle. 3.6 SAMPLE FOR THE STUDY The sample for the present study comprised of 74 students from two divisions, 9Q and 9G of Feroke Government Ganapet Vocational Higher Secondary School, Feroke. The school had 9 divisions for standard IX. Each division was a random mix of students of different achievement level, intelligence and socio-economic status since no criterion was used by the school to assign a student to a particular division. Each division included both boys and guls and roughly had strength of 40 students. The investigator had the freedom to choose two divisions from the 7 divisions for conducting the study. And thus the two divisions 9Q and 9G were selected on a random basis. Out of the two, 9Q was selected as the
Metlzodology 7 control group and 9G as the experimental group purely on a random basis. 3.7 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE 3.7. THE RESEARCH DESIGN The symbolic representation of the study is given below - Pre tests - Post tests - Gain Score - Gain Score - Experimental Group - Control Group - Application of Experimental Treatment - Application of Control Treatment The design of the present treatment is illustrated in the following chart.
Chart showinp the pivotal steps in the design of the study Selection of Topic for Treatment a :l Preparation of Problem a Solving Ability Test i; Preparation of Achievement Test a $ Preparation of Instructional Materials a Selection of Sample U Allocation of Experimental a and Control Groups Experimental Group Control Group a 8 ii Teaching through Mastery Teachmg in the Conventional Learning Strategy Post Test Scoring and Consolidation 0 Statistical Techniques Q Analysis and Interpretation
Methodology 9 3.7.2 ALLOCATION OF EXPERIMENTAL GROUP AND CONTROL GROUP The present study is an experimental one and the design applied here is pre-test post-test design. Two class divisions fiom the same school (Feroke Government Ganapet Vocational Higher Secondary School, Feroke.) were taken for the experiment. For thls the investigator obtained permission fiom the headmistress of the school. The classes selected for the study were selected on a random basis. The two classes were tested for homogeneity by Multivariate ANOVA for Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence, sex and Socio-Economic Status and were found to be matching so as to be considered as homogeneous groups. Out of whlch one was assigned to be control group and other the experimental group on a random basis. 3.7.3 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE The data required for the actual study was collected during the progressive stages of the treatment itself. The Nonverbal Intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Previous Achievement were measured right at the beginning, as they were the variables to be treated as covariates. All the tests were admmstered during morning sessions before the commencement of the class. 3.7.3. Pre Test In the first stage of the experiment, apart fiom the measurement of nonverbal intelligence, Verbal Intelligence and Socio-Economic Status for ensuring the homogeneity of the groups- the initial scores on
Methodology 20 achevement (Previous Achevenient) and Problem Solving Ability were measured in both groups. For this the standardised achievement test and the standardised Problem Solving Ability test prepared by the investigator were given as pre test. The pre test scores on achievement were very low signifjrlng the lack of competency over the content portion, yet to be taught. But the pre test scores on Problem Solving Ability showed a healher distribution suggesting that Problem Solving Ability is more innate rather than trained or taught. 3.7.3.2 Experimental Treatment (The Mastery Learning Strategy) The investigator himself taught the experimental group as well as the control group. The experimental group was taught through Mastery Learning Strategy. The pattern of instruction followed in the experimental treatment is already detailed in section 3.5.6 of ths chapter. Mastery Learning Strategy demands congruence among instructional components - the learning out comes, instruction, evaluation and the feedback and corrective component. For example, if students are expected to learn higher level abilities such as those involved in application or analysis, mastery learning stipulates that instructional activities be planned to give students opportunities to engage actively in those abilities (Guskey, 995). The new revised state curriculum is based on the problem solving way of learning with emphasis on activities and process skills during instruction. Evaluation also is in congruence with the instruction in the sense that the questions are out to test the hgher-level outcomes of learning including Problem Solving Ability.